March 31 marks the 80th anniversary of Alexei Ilyich Osipov, professor at the Moscow Theological Academy, a well-known Russian theologian, teacher and publicist. . On the eve of the anniversary, we talked with Alexei Ilyich about his life path, contemporary issues spiritual life and what was good about the "Iron Curtain" in Soviet time.
Dear Alexey Ilyich!
The brethren of the Sretensky Monastery, students and teachers of the Seminary, thousands of parishioners of our Sretensky Monastery join in the numerous congratulations addressed to you today. A life wholly dedicated to Christ and His Church - what could be more beautiful than this! You are celebrating your eightieth anniversary by tirelessly preaching the Word of the Gospel, bringing many people to God, strengthening Christians in faith and piety, proclaiming the Kingdom of Heaven, the salvation and love of God to the human race. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts, dear Alexei Ilyich, for setting yourself above all else as the goal of remaining a disciple of Christ in everything, for setting this example for us through your life for many decades.
I remember how you once complained about the many jubilee "many years", and instead of them you yourself wished for eternal rest and the Kingdom of Heaven. Prayerfully I join your wish: the Kingdom of Heaven to you, salvation, joy in the Lord Jesus Christ, peace, strength of mental and bodily strength!
yours,
Bishop Tikhon
with brethren, students and parishioners of the Sretensky Monastery
On Spiritual Guides and the Zeitgeist
– Aleksey Ilyich, you have been teaching at the MTA for 50 years. Have the seminarians changed in any way during this time?
– Change in accordance with the spirit of the times. “Times are changing and we are changing with them.” I remember in our time to get "failed" was a tragedy! The poor boy ran after the teacher and asked when he could retake. And now they appoint a retake, and they don’t come to it! Only under the threat of exclusion.
Didn't that happen in your time?
It was impossible to even imagine.
– When did everything change?
“I entered in 1958. Well, in the 1960s and 1970s, even before Perestroika, everything remained the same, but changed somewhere towards the end of the 1980s.
The moral level was then still much higher and cleaner. Now the Internet is very bad. The availability of all this dirt paralyzes spirituality in the human soul.
- Who influenced your development the most?
- Most of all - Abbot Nikon (Vorobiev). And to this day, as soon as the opportunity arises, I publish his books and letters in all versions. Why did he make such an impression on me? Firstly, this is a person who most of all amazed me with the search for the meaning of life. He spared nothing: neither time, nor strength, nor youth, nothing for this. In his youth, having left a religious peasant family, he lost his faith. In a real school he had already become an atheist, rushed into science, then into philosophy. By the way, he had a great knowledge of philosophy. Then he entered the Petrograd Institute of Psychology. All this time he was looking for the meaning of life, and he found it - it was, of course, a miracle - he found it in God. In 1931, he became a monk. What kind of person could do that then?
– You knew Abbot Nikon personally. Tell about it.
– Our acquaintance began in Kozelsk. Mom was looking for a confessor for herself, and some nun said: “Well, perhaps Father Nikon will be better.” He also prepared me for the seminary, where I immediately entered the last, fourth, course, having passed the exams for the three previous courses.
You could discuss any topic with him. Abbot Nikon had no authoritarianism, despotism, he gave freedom of thought and answered all questions. He recommended that I read John of the Ladder and Vladimir Solovyov, Abba Dorotheus and some Gompertz, his History of Ancient Philosophy, the historian of philosophy Zeller and The Philokalia. Can you imagine?
I was the boy who argued to the death with him. He himself asked me, and answered all my questions - and in the field of philosophy, and literature, and theology. At one time he was invited to teach at the Leningrad Theological School, but he refused, realizing that this would be very distracting and distract from inner life. Father Nikon was a very well-read person. And it was thanks to him that I acquired very strong convictions in the Christian faith.
I have so far talked about the mental side of the matter, but he had no less influence on me precisely in the spiritual plane. He constantly talked about the spiritual life and its basic laws.
By nature, I am a skeptic, but here I am sure that it was really a holy man. Moreover, a saint is not even on a moral scale (there is nothing to say about this), but a saint precisely in spiritual life. There are many facts when he directly revealed his holiness. In particular, related to me personally.
- Tell me! It is very interesting.
- Let me give you one example. Once he brings me to the door, takes a ruler and says: “Let's cross out, Lesha, your height.” I, of course, agreed with interest. And then every week he outlined how my height changed. This went on for two and a half months, and then he suddenly stopped doing it. I say: "Father, more." He does not want. I again: “Well, more!” He replied: “Do you want to be higher than God?” But when I then came to the class, everyone screamed, especially the girls: “Alik, what has become!” I have grown so much in these two months that everyone was amazed. But the main thing is that the priest unexpectedly began to measure me - and just as unexpectedly finished. This is just one of the facts.
– Can you name someone else whose influence on you would be comparable to that of Abbot Nikon?
– No one else, although, of course, after his death in 1963, I met very good priests. Well, pure angels came across. But still, it's, you know, like a child or an infant compared to an adult.
I also really liked John (Krestyankin), but I never met him. My attitude towards him is very positive. And here's what is amazing: I never met him, did not correspond or talk to him. And suddenly, one day, Father John (Krestyankin) sends me his book with a dedicatory inscription. It was, it seems, the year 2000.
Why is modernity dangerous for spiritual life?
– In your lectures, you especially often quote Saints Ignatius (Bryanchaninov) and Theophan the Recluse. Why?
- It good question. Indeed, I often turn to Ignatius (Bryanchaninov) and Theophan the Recluse (to the latter, however, less often). The fact is that the ancient fathers, with all their splendor and amazing depth, the language and their very style of thinking is difficult for the perception of a modern person. And the fathers of the 19th century are much closer to us and therefore more accessible in terms of the language and nature of the presentation of those basic truths of spiritual life that we need so much.
The second point, connected with the appeal to Ignatius (Bryanchaninov) and Theophan the Recluse, is that they were able to shift the experience of the ancient fathers to the level that is most accessible modern man. What man? Who cannot even dream of the exploits of the ancient fathers and those high states that they achieved. That is, their exposition is already given in relation to our, I would say, meager, but still Christian level of spiritual life.
Of course, if we talk about Theophan the Recluse, then he is also interesting because of how he changed spiritually throughout his life. Here are some startling facts. For example, in one of his letters he blesses the translation of some Catholic author. So he says: "Yes, I bless." But some time passes, and he resolutely speaks about the damage of Catholicism in literally everything, that the spiritual life of Catholics is greatly distorted. And, accordingly, he absolutely does not recommend contacting Catholic authors. Or another example: in 1883, he blesses the publication of The Frank Stories of a Wanderer, and 10 years later he categorically forbids them and says that they contain something that can lead to delusion.
These are just two examples. In fact, there are many more.
Why has it changed so much, and why in recent years?
– Theophan the Recluse is interesting because you can see how he grew spiritually. We are somehow used to: once a saint, then, it means that he is equally holy in any period of his life. But this is not always the case. If a prudent thief had written something before his crucifixion, would we have read it?! “Bless, honest father, read the prudent robber!” Everyone would have been horrified. Holiness is not something that is given immediately, but something that is gradually built up. Theophan the Recluse is extremely interesting in this respect.
– Aren’t Saints Ignatius and Theophanes outdated then in our day? Still, a lot of time has passed since then, life has changed a lot. We live in a world of gadgets and information technology, our century is very different from the 19th.
- You're right. Already they do not quite correspond, as they say now, to our mentality. The language itself has changed a lot. Especially if you take the language of Bishop Theophan. He did not like any new words, could not stand any foreignness. And in Ignatius (Bryanchaninov) the language is not so much of the 19th century, but even of the end of the 18th century. It is becoming more and more difficult to find authors who would write the same things and express the essence of spiritual life in the same exact way already in modern language.
True, I remember once in Finland I went to a Russian bookstore and saw there the letters of the Valaam elder, schiigumen John (Alekseev). I admit, I took the book somewhat carelessly - I think: yes, there were already so many different letters. But once I started reading, I couldn't put it down! And now how many reprints we have done. Please - modern and very simple language. Father John was not a very educated person, but he deeply understood the spiritual life.
Or another figure - the same abbot Nikon (Vorobiev), who, on the contrary, was a very educated person. His letters also contain modern language and precise, deep formulations. Here, please, is another transcription, if you like, of the same thoughts and ideas that we find both in the ancient fathers and in Saints Ignatius and Theophan. And this is the 20th century.
– You just called the level of modern Christian life “meager”. What do you have in mind?
- Here's the thing. In order for there to be spiritual achievements, a corresponding life is necessary. This life consists, firstly - which has always been obvious for all religions, not only for Christianity - in asceticism. There is no asceticism - it is impossible to expect any achievements. But what kind of asceticism can we talk about now? It is very difficult for a modern person in the conditions of our century to lead a life that would be completely detached from the incessant worldly fuss and huge information flows.
Second, even our monasteries are no longer the same. They are now, at least predominantly, and sometimes almost completely, engaged in economic and tourist, sorry, I was mistaken, pilgrimage activities. The monks meet with everyone. And look what the holy fathers wrote: one look at a woman is already confusing. The only achievement that a modern Christian and monk can have is to sincerely realize his inability to be what he calls himself, to humble himself, not to judge other people and really repent (and not to report on confession about the sins committed).
- I think that this is a departure from the most important thing, because the kingdom of God is within you(Luke 17:20). There is also a saying: “A monk who has left his cell will not return to it the same.” Why? Absent-mindedness, many impressions and new sins. Monasticism, the holy fathers unanimously say, is not without smart doing, that is, without constant mental-heart prayer - mainly the Jesus Prayer. And what smart doing in networks and blogs is just fleas. Even to learn more or less undistracted prayer - and this turns out to be unattainable.
- Then I would like to ask more specifically what exactly in modern times prevents a concentrated spiritual life and asceticism, what factors? Perhaps this is even inevitable in the conditions of the consumer society in which we live?
There are at least two points to note here. I have already started talking about the first one. Too much information, communication and impressions. For example, we can no longer live without mobile phones. Our education and self-education is scattered into many things. But this is a state of distraction. Try scattered light make the paper burn. And take a lens, focus the rays - and please, everything caught fire.
The second point that we must accept, although it is not very pleasant: there is a degeneration of humanity, a certain degradation of the human being. Even in terms of the psyche, more and more sick, handicapped people are born. Their percentage increases literally before our eyes. In general, it is already difficult for a modern person to strain himself in order to fight with himself. He will fight with anything and anyone - with politicians, clergymen, public ulcers - but not with his conceit and selfishness. The poet rightly said: “Yes, the fight with oneself is the most difficult fight. Victory from victories is victory over yourself. The very essence of asceticism - the struggle with passions - can be said to have disappeared from the consciousness of Christian life, but I'm not even talking about non-Christian life.
Perhaps these reasons are related. The consumer society specifically stimulates human passions in order to intensify consumption.
- Yes, of course, all this is interconnected. But, by the way, you know, the ancient fathers said that the last people will not have our exploits and will be incapable of them, and they indicated why. And the main reason is very interesting: they will be very proud! Many people spoke about this, in particular, Anthony the Great, Isaac the Syrian. So the main reason for the gradual progress of modern degeneration is precisely pride.
- Alexey Ilyich, and some secular publicist of moderately free views would turn to you now and say that you are not a humanist and simply do not want the best for a person. So that he lives comfortably, well, does not torment himself and his loved ones: what kind of struggle with passions, why is this necessary? What would you say to that?
- I would say to him: do not torture your child, let him be happy. Do not burden him with all sorts of activities, lessons and circles. Give him whatever he wants. Let him be comfortable and well. You will say to me: “Excuse me, but what will happen to him next?” You don't need to think about it. The main thing is happiness now. That is why Christianity says that a person is indestructible and eternal life awaits him, happiness in which is impossible if passions are not defeated: selfishness, envy, conceit, malice, etc.
- And they will tell you again: we are not children, we have already grown up and we can decide for ourselves what we need.
- So decide: either torment the child with school, institute, work, so that later he will have a good life, or leave everything to the mercy of his desires and hobbies. By the way, the number of addicts is growing steadily.
Tell it to the athletes, to those who want to achieve something. See how they work. I once went with one athlete from the national team of our country. He told me how much they do, and I was horrified! If we want to achieve something, work is always required. Ascetic - who is this? Athlete, translated from Greek.
- But for what training and all the torment, you ask? What for?
– For the sake of achieving the main value. For an athlete, for example, sports achievements and an Olympic gold medal are more valuable than peace and sitting in an easy chair. So here. We don't have here abiding city, but the coming city I will seek(Heb. 13:14), writes the Apostle Paul. So what do we live on? Striving for eternal life. And so we are trying now to do everything possible for maximum spiritual achievements, which will also guarantee our eternal spiritual life. Faith in eternity is what drives a Christian.
- It turns out that possible reason of the modern impoverishment of the Christian faith is that the living, real faith in eternal life is lost?
Dostoevsky writes a lot about this. In particular, for example, he says: "Only with faith in his immortality does a person comprehend his entire rational goal on earth."
- Then it turns out that consumer society arose because such a living faith in eternal life may have been lost.
- Quite right. Why is the struggle of religion and atheism or materialism going on all the time. Or or. These are two incompatible worldviews.
Western comfort aims for the freedom of passions
– Do you think that the comfort of life interferes with the spiritual life in general?
- The very concept of comfort should be tried to describe and concretize. What comfort?
- Vital, social. It is generally accepted, for example, that life in the West is more settled and prosperous than here, in Russia. This is the comfort, because of which some of our compatriots left and continue to go abroad. Do you think such comfort is harmful, useful or indifferent to spiritual life?
“Christianity is not against a person having what is necessary for life, but it is against everything that goes beyond the boundaries of necessity. To define and describe this need is another matter. Isaac Sirin said interestingly that one bread a day is enough for him. However,” he added, “if I talk to someone, even two are not enough for me. The Western system aims to create for human life warm vodka. And the holy fathers and ascetics say that in such a warm environment a person very soon relaxes and can no longer achieve anything spiritual, therefore a cold shower is needed, which is precisely asceticism. Without a cold shower, it is impossible to tone a person.
What is Western comfort aimed at? To the freedom of passions. And Christianity says that passions are the source of suffering. And now there is a confrontation between two worldviews: the freedom of passions or the struggle against passions. Comfort is, in the final analysis, the freedom of passions under a plausible pretext.
- Once, back in Soviet times, I performed in Germany. There were a lot of people, and they asked the following question: “Since your Church is clearly enslaved, does it mean that you have almost no Church? But we have freedom, and everything is fine with faith.” And I, before going to the lecture, out of curiosity, just looked into some Protestant church, and I answer: “Very well, excellent question. Today is Sunday, I went to the temple, and there are only a few people comfortably sitting there. And in our church, parishioners are stuffed like herrings in a barrel, and in winter they stand for several hours in fur coats. So tell me, please: where is the more living Church? You are in a bath with warm water, and we are in a cold shower.” They especially liked the cold shower and even applauded.
- But there was a cold shower in Soviet times. Now there is no such pressure on the Church.
– Yes, the cold shower is now over. But this is a dangerous business. We start to want more and more and relax.
- Nevertheless, as far as I know, you still think that the situation with faith in Russia is still better than in the West.
- Indeed, you are right. I think that bye better. We still retain a certain inertia of faith in the patristic teaching, which speaks of the need to struggle with oneself and one's passions, the need for ascetic deeds, the preservation of fasts, long divine services, and so on. As Christ said: This kind is driven out by fasting and prayer(Matthew 17:21). In the West, this is almost non-existent. I once asked the rector in a Catholic seminary in Bratislava: do they have fasts? He hesitated a little, but said: yes, there is. On Ash Wednesday (their Lent begins on Wednesday, not on Monday, as we do, and this day is called Ash Wednesday) and on Good Friday, students eat once a day and without meat.
Isaac the Syrian writes: “Any prayer in which the body did not bother and the heart did not grieve is counted as one with the premature fetus of the womb, because such a prayer does not have a soul in itself.” We still have this tone. It doesn't exist in the West at all.
In Soviet times, the spiritual level of people was higher
- Since we are talking about the Soviet era, it would be very interesting to ask you how do you feel about it and Russian communism? Do you think it was a complete failure in the history of Russia, or did communism have its own attractive sides, oddly enough?
– Paradoxically, it is a fact that many Christian ideas and principles of moral life were still preserved in our communism. In particular, I would like to draw your attention to the following idea. One high-ranking person once said: “I am completely at a loss, I don’t know what to give preference to: Soviet atheism with its rather high level of moral requirements or democratic freedom, in which all morality is lost?”
Compare at least cartoons - Soviet and American. After all, it’s not without reason that everyone says: “Soviet cartoons, how good they are!” On the other hand, of course, if we take the worldview of Soviet atheism, then it was some kind of squalor, you can’t pick another word. But at the same time, I remember when I started teaching "Basic Theology" at the Theological Academy, I began to subscribe to the journals "Science and Religion", "Problems of Philosophy", "Around the World", "Science and Life". And what is striking: despite the prevailing atheism, there were interesting articles directly Christian character, and food for thought. So, answering your question, I will say that yes, after all, in Soviet times, despite atheism, the spiritual level, oddly enough, was higher.
- What explains this paradox that in Soviet times the ruling ideology was atheistic and communist, but at the same time the spiritual level of people was higher than today?
- I explain this by some inertia of the past, there were still many people who came out of the old, pre-revolutionary time. The moral foundations of life were still preserved. In addition, there was a happy "iron curtain" that prevented the penetration of Western ideology, those Catholic-Protestant and nihilistic moral principles of life that dominate the West.
– But now it is practically unrealizable for a new “curtain” to appear.
– Yes, that’s all, there are no ideological boundaries left. By the way, hegumen Nikon (Vorobiev), whom I sometimes refer to, spoke directly and even wrote in letters: “It’s good that our border is closed. This is the great mercy of God to our people. We would be flooded (especially America) with diabolical, satanic and sectarian literature, and Russian people are very greedy for everything foreign.
– In your speeches, you sometimes speak quite critically about the pre-revolutionary Church in the Synodal period, that it became practically a state department and therefore lost its power. How do you see her current state?
—Now the Church has received a very significant freedom of inner life. However, the fact is that they got freedom, but how they used it is another question. We pay a lot of attention to the outer side of church activity, and much less to the spiritual side. Notice, for example, how is the service going? Especially when they are of a solemn nature, when they are performed by bishops. Photo and television correspondents with their equipment and Jupiters are walking around the temple, pushing the faithful, and even along the altar. At the same time, the deacon proclaims: “Catechumens, depart!” The operators, of course, are not publicized - they, most likely, simply do not believe in God, they do not care about God.
Or a touching announcement in the temple: "After the Divine Liturgy, Shrovetide festivities." Can you imagine? In the Church, this is preparation for fasting, almost fasting. For a people far from Christianity, this is a time of fun entertainment. And where are the believers invited?!
I remember that in Soviet times, a Catholic came to the academy from somewhere and asked in a conversation: “Here, we are striving to bring people to the Church, but how are you?” I replied: "But we are trying not to to Churches, and in Bring the church to the people." I also remember how one Protestant in America told me: "We do everything to ensure that our churches are not boring, to entertain people."
What should the church life be like? What does it mean to "come to the Church" and not "to the Church"?
– To put it bluntly, to enter the Church means to live according to the Gospel commandments, and not only according to Moses. It is even ashamed to say to a Christian, for example, “Thou shalt not kill,” “Thou shalt not steal.” Christianity is not just a moral life, but a spiritual one, which consists in the determination both in mind and heart (and not just behavior) to live according to the Gospel and fight with your bad thoughts, inclinations - everything that contradicts the spirit of truth, love and chastity.
When it comes to church life. We continuously host all kinds of events, conferences, forums on a variety of topics, but try to find, for example, on such topics: "Main problems of spiritual life today" or "Specifics of Orthodox spirituality." We are talking about drunkenness, alcoholism, drug addiction, economics, sports, ecology, etc. And although this is not indifferent to the Church, is it really the main thing for Christianity?
– In your opinion, is it possible to say that the Christian life begins with repentance, and the main thing is to see your sins? What is it, perhaps, the central thing, thanks to which salvation is possible? Or is this a simplified representation?
“It all depends on how you understand it. Of course, without seeing one's sins there can be no spiritual life. After all, it all consists in the gradual healing of the rubbish that we are full of. How is healing possible? I cannot heal myself. I know in advance that I will sit at the table and be sure to bulk up. What remains? "Lord, forgive me!" Spiritual life begins only through repentance. But we are talking about sincere repentance, and not about talking with the tongue. And I am not talking about this on my own behalf, but because all the holy fathers write about it. However, at the same time, they most decisively draw the attention of a person not only to their actions, to morality, but to the state of the soul - to their thoughts, feelings, aspirations, dreams, that is, to their spiritual state. For it is possible to be morally and normal, and at the same time remain selfish, proud, envious, conceited, etc. They say about such people: "Holy Satan."
- And what, really: is he bad person? Indeed, he did no harm to anyone. Just a good person, a normal good person.
- For example, he did no harm to anyone, but what good did he do in the Christian sense? Christ says: love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you.(Matthew 5:44). Did any of this? No. And Scripture says: Turn away from evil and do good(Ps. 33:15).
– But you may be asked: shouldn’t you do works of mercy, conduct social activities and help those in need? They will take it and say: they say, Professor Osipov believes that it is not necessary to help those in need.
- No one denies acts of mercy. But how a person treats his good deeds is an extremely important question. You can do outward good and be conceited, proud of it. And then it becomes evil for you. Saint Ignatius (Bryanchaninov) wrote: “A bodily feat that is not accompanied by a mental one is more harmful than useful. It causes an unusual increase in spiritual passions: vanity, hypocrisy, cunning, pride, hatred, envy, conceit. “Our good deeds must be hidden not only from people, but also from ourselves...”. That is, the main attention should be paid to the state of the soul, because without the right internal basis external activity can lose not only all its significance, but also turn against a person. That foundation is humility. And without humility, say the holy fathers, there is no goodness. Without humility there is no real love, and without love there is no truth, no justice, no virtue, nothing. And true love is generated only by the right inner – humble – state of mind.
I have an iPhone but I don't use it.
– If I may, a couple more personal questions. Your personal attitude towards information technology- a computer, mobile phone Do you use them and how often?
- There is a mobile phone and a computer. Once I wrote everything on paper, now I write everything only on the computer. I have an iPhone, but I use practically only a push-button phone.
– How often do you use the Internet?
I almost never look. Unless sometimes, when the link is sent. He takes a lot of time. You open one Internet page - and off you go: one after another, it captivates. Here you grab yourself: “Stop! Otherwise, you'll drown."
– So you have some kind of media austerity?
- Oh, I'm an ascetic. This is undeniable. (laughs)
—What advice would you give to our readers who are sincerely interested in the spiritual life?
My advice is very personal. Since it is extremely difficult to find a spiritually experienced mentor now, as St. Isaac the Syrian and other fathers advise, one should seek teaching, support, and an explanation of many issues related to spiritual life from the holy fathers. Now they are being published - this is the great mercy of God. But the holy fathers also need to be understood correctly, and people have less and less time. Therefore, I can recommend the closest, accessible both in language and in terms of our level of perception, and at the same time conveying all the most important provisions of spiritual life. These are letters from Abbess Arsenia (Sebryakova), the Elder of Valaam, Sheigumen John (Alekseev), Abbot Nikon (Vorobiev).
Their thoughts, ideas, teachings are strikingly similar, almost one to one. These books, I think, should be on the desktop of a modern Orthodox Christian. And not only Orthodox. Many non-Orthodox who have begun to read them write to me and thank me, because Christianity opened up to them from a completely different side, in comparison with what secularized Christianity in the West is now permeated with, which captivates someone in our country, and with which most of our people are infected. a people seeking only miracles, healings, seers and predictions.
With Alexey Osipov
interviewed by Yuri Pushchaev
“Laziness appears where interest in life disappears,” my friend formulated. And I suddenly realized that she was right. Rights to one hundred, if not a thousand percent! It is useless to look for new ways of self-motivation, try on new techniques and experiment with incentives as long as we look at life through a cloudy glass, huddled in a rickety house of everyday life.
We hope that by initiating change, we will color our life with colors and return the lost taste for life. But no. Changes are not initiated, laziness flourishes and willpower is fading before our eyes. We respect ourselves less and less, believe in our strengths and less and less often try to change something. So that once again not to face their own weakness.
Laziness - it is she who is guilty of all our misfortunes. Many people think so. That's what I thought too. Each time I tried to overcome my inner resistance and once again suffered a crushing defeat, I became more and more convinced of my own weakness. In the inability to complete what has been started and in the absence of willpower. (Moreover, when it came to the interests of friends or work, willpower appeared from somewhere and showed amazing success).
The words of a friend in an instant put the missing puzzle in place. Of course, not laziness is the root cause. Loss of interest in life is my main problem.
Artificial attempts to stimulate desires by scrolling fashion magazines and watching sketches from the life of stars is a pathetic surrogate compared to the emotions that shabby books of adventure and magic gave me as a child. This is real life - it seemed to me then, and I was looking forward to growing up and being able to enter this exciting adult world.
I grew up - and the world turned out to be different. Or maybe by that moment I had lost something very important - myself.
While reading Julia Cameron's wonderful book The Artist's Way, I tried to do a simple exercise, the task of which is to determine what is interesting for that creative, liberated and brilliant child who sits in each of us. The task was simple: without hesitation, quickly write 10 activities or actions that seem exciting to you and that we would decide on if we were allowed to.
Simple question, isn't it? And you know, except for the banal travel (in a comfortable cabin, of course, and not at the helm of a pirate ship, as I dreamed of in childhood), I DID NOT WANT anything. My inner child just didn't respond
Years of ignoring the inner creator have taken their toll. He - no, I don't want to believe that he died - he just fell asleep. Or he hid, afraid that his next impulse would be trampled on by the reasonable judgments of unfortunate adults.
Where can I get energy, strength and desire if the inner well of happiness is blocked? If we are looking for an answer in books, blogs, religion - in anything but in ourselves.
We have forgotten how to hear ourselves, trust ourselves and love. We have forgotten how to take risks, because risking for an alien goal is more like jumping into an abyss. And we do not want to jump over it, because deep down we know that not a single formal achievement will give us the necessary emotions. It will not give the joy of being and happiness.
The only way to forget about laziness is to wake up the child in yourself, to give him what he has been missing all these years - love, attention and support. Not everyone will be able to get through right away. Someone will be helped to remember forgotten feelings by favorite children's activities - long live paintball, rope training, dancing for seniors and creative studios for adults. Someone may decide to travel to countries that they read about in adventure novels. Each of us will have our own path. But I am sure that everyone will be able to go through this path to the end, because only he is the real one. Because this is the only way to live, opening your heart to the beautiful and joyfully accepting the unknown.
Let all of us who are unsuccessfully trying to change our lives for one year give up these attempts. Let's drop this weight of the loser and just surrender to the process of self-discovery. I am sure that even the most busy people can snatch several hours a day from the TV for creativity, walking, communicating with school friends (namely with school friends - they will not only return us to childhood, but also save us from discussing work topics).
Let's write blogs, share discoveries and comment. Let's just live without thinking how much more successful we have become in the eyes of others. Let's learn to live with feelings, not with reason (in our free time, of course), let's do crazy things and experiment. With your appearance, your home, your life.
And the goals - let them wait a bit. Very soon we will be ready to return to their choice again. But it will already be a sincere and TRUE choice. A choice that will not require us to show miracles of willpower and fight laziness, but will itself give strength and energy to overcome the Path. Because it will be OUR way, OUR choice and OUR life.
"MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COURIER" No. 25.2005
IT IS NECESSARY TO FIGHT THE TERROR SYSTEM
BUT IT IS NECESSARY TO CHANGE THE APPROACHES AND METHODS OF THIS FIGHT
Leonid IVASHOV
Vice President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems,
colonel general
Almost five years of large-scale, planetary campaign to combat international terrorism ended in a bloody drama in London. Moreover, this is not just another series of terrorist attacks, this is a political challenge to the most developed, most powerful countries in the world, whose leaders gathered in Scotland in the same days in the G8 format.
Incidentally, it is the G8 countries that are the most active fighters against terror. So we can talk about the failure of this very struggle.
So far, terrorists have attacked the capitals of four of these countries - the US, Russia, Spain and the UK. In this regard, it is important to identify what is common in the policies of these states, which encourages extremist organizations to aim their strikes at their territory.
The most obvious is the version of "punishment" for the invasion of US, British and Spanish troops into Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as for the intention to attack Iran and Syria. Therefore, the Islamic resistance movement, represented not only by fanatical Islamist groups, but simply by patriotic citizens of Islamic states, as well as Muslims living in Western countries, is opposed to the invaders, against the policy of armed expansion.
And sentiments, especially those that develop into convictions, tend to be converted into specific actions, including terrorist ones. There are millions of such people who consider themselves at war with those who came into their world with weapons in their hands to impose the so-called "democracy and freedom". And they simply transfer military operations to the territory of their opponents. This is what all warring countries and coalitions do, as did the United States and Great Britain during the Second World War.
The goals of those who carry out the attacks are also obvious. This is not a military victory over the enemy and not the defeat of his armed forces. Here, the weapon is completely different - information-psychological.
With its help, there is powerful pressure and coercion, with the help of their own citizens, to refuse to participate in military operations on the territory of Islamic countries. With Spain, such a thing happened. The temptation arises: why not do similar operations with others?
The terrorists' allies are primarily the media. Such a symbiosis turns into a kind of weapon of mass destruction. At the same time, tens (if not hundreds) of millions of citizens are simultaneously defeated, the consciousness of people is affected by a syndrome of fear. And here the media, especially television, play a decisive role, bringing to the attention of millions of people the bloody pictures from the scene.
Other allies of terrorists are governments and those in power. political parties many countries of the world, and above all the countries that have been subjected to a terrorist attack. Significant results are being achieved in foreign and domestic policy under the slogan of combating terrorist evil.
The events of September 11, 2001 gave the George W. Bush administration a reason to solve the following global tasks:
Destroy the principles of interstate relations laid down in the Yalta-Potsdam system of the post-war world order;
Break free from the fetters of the tripolar (USSR, USA, Non-Aligned Movement) system of checks and balances and make a claim for a unipolar world;
Invade the most important geostrategic regions of the world, lining up in a column of support for their actions not only NATO allies, but also geopolitical rivals, including Russia and China, whose zone of influence, in fact, the Americans invaded;
To master the richest reserves of energy resources.
Regarding the latter goal, the well-known American analyst N. Chomsky writes: "Our leaders are not crazy at all. It's just that they finally had an exceptional opportunity to realize their old plans to seize the second largest oil fields in the world after Saudi Arabia." Let us add that with the invasion of Iraq, George W. Bush is paying not only oil companies, but also with the American military-industrial complex, which also invested hundreds of millions of dollars in his victory in the presidential election. London, with its unbridled support for the Bush administration, also wants to feast on Iraqi oil and fuel its military-industrial complex enterprises with military orders.
As for the internal tasks solved in the course of terrorist attacks by the governments of the “affected” countries, the following can be identified among them: the suppression of opposition forces, the tightening of the police regime in the country, the psychological preparation of the population to support any external actions, including military aggression against other states.
The tool for achieving these goals is fear, replicated by the media. “This fear,” writes N. Chomsky in the Freitag weekly, “is one of the important means in the politics of the “war parties” ... They want war, because war exacerbates the feeling of fear. The frightened population is silent, it bows before the authorities: Americans must be in an appropriate mood (that is, in fear. - Approx. Author). In no case should they be allowed to think about pensions or the health care system. "
In some situations with terrorist attacks, the authorities simply use this tragic moment to their advantage. But let's not rule out a situation in which the same government acts as the customer of the terrorist act, not only abroad, but also on the territory of their own country. It's hard to believe, but a number of signs may indicate this. In the same America, on the eve of September 11, 2001, decisions were made to facilitate the action. In the UK, literally on the eve of the terrorist attacks, the degree of readiness to repel the terrorist threat was reduced. And this, we recall, at a time when the G8 of heads of state was gathering in Scotland, which, as a rule, on the contrary, causes an unprecedented increase in security measures.
This conclusion is also supported by the mutual distrust of the special services of the countries of the anti-terrorist coalition, which hide information about the terrorist network from each other. And the notorious "al-Qaeda" (if it exists as a developed network), it seems, no one is seriously looking for. Rather, it and other structures of an extremist type are contracted by the special services, drug cartels, and TNCs. This, by the way, was emphasized by I. Karimov, President of Uzbekistan, speaking about the organizers of the tragedy in Andijan.
Returning to the events in London, let us emphasize the fact that it is Great Britain that is the most densely European country, is saturated with the headquarters of extremist organizations, even those who are forbidden to be in most Islamic states. The most odious leaders of the Chechen fighters are also hiding there, and financial resources are being concentrated.
One side, similar situation always risky for the UK itself, but on the other hand, it is both a massive source of information about the terrorist network, and, at the same time, a weapon of special services against fellow rivals.
Today it is customary to talk about terror as a global phenomenon. We can agree with this if we include coalition terrorism (NATO against Yugoslavia, coalition against Iraq), interstate, intrastate, religious, civilizational terrorism. But then such concepts as aggression, interference in the internal affairs of another state, occupation, colonialism, national liberation movement, the right to individual and collective self-defense, etc. are taken out of use. And this camouflage is also politics, a conscious policy that replaces concepts .
Unfortunately, we have to state that the initiator of the promotion of terror was Western civilization, the policy of military and economic expansion, the inculcation of consumer values, base morality, the universalization of political systems, lack of spirituality, and propaganda of violence. All this, promoted under the flag of freedom and democracy, is boomeranging back to the capitals of Western states.
And one more feature of modern terror: according to S. Huntington, it is increasingly acquiring the features of a "clash of civilizations." And again, the Western powers are the initiators of this process. In the events of September 11, 2001 and July 7, 2005, immediately after the explosions, the "Islamic trace" is moving into the public consciousness. Moreover, this is done first at the level of assumptions, without evidence, then the information leaked from state structures is immediately replicated, and the image of a bearded Muslim with explosives at the ready is formed in the heads of the population. Osama bin Laden is again pulled out on TV screens, and in a voice on duty he confirms participation in the terrorist attack of Al-Qaeda.
In the situation with the New York twin towers, the directions of the American attack were immediately indicated: the system international law(principles of the UN Charter), Iraqi oil, anti-American motives in the policy of the Saudi regime.
What will the action bring in London? The following can be assumed:
Activation of support for the strategy of combating international terrorism, which means support for the ideologists of this struggle represented by the administrations of George Bush and Blair;
Argumentation of the need for the presence of US and NATO military bases in Central Asia and the deployment of new bases in the Caucasus (Georgia, Azerbaijan);
Preparation of an attack on Iran, Syria (we should expect the "revealing" of the Syrian-Iranian trace in the London events).
On the other hand, we can expect the Islamic world to consolidate with other civilizations closer in essence and its more active action against the USA, Israel, Great Britain, their satellites and allies. That is, again, the promotion of intercivilizational confrontation is evident.
Russia, which has not determined its geopolitical place in the modern world order, does not have its own geopolitical idea and is trying to follow in line with the US political strategy and only occasionally integrate into China's strategy, is doomed to be the object of influence of diverse destructive systems, including a terrorist network.
It is certainly necessary to fight the system of terror. But it is necessary to change the approaches and methods of this struggle. If terrorism is a product of external and domestic policy states, therefore, it is necessary to change the policy, and not just increase the number of policemen and tighten the political regime, limiting the rights of citizens.
Unfortunately, at the summit of the heads of state - members of the G8 it was about something completely different. So, we need to wait for new terrorist attacks.
To comment, you must register on the site.
A person always has certain fears regardless of their age. Fears are divided into two types - these are human and pathological. A person himself can still fight with human ones, but only specialists will help with pathological ones. Pathological anxieties are called phobias, which are mental disorders.
To bookmarks
What are the most common human fears?
There are a lot of human phobias, and there are even unusual ones. The most common fear is the one when it is very difficult for a person to communicate with strangers. He may even begin to stutter if someone comes up to meet him. A person is afraid to open up, to show himself from the inside, so he does not like to get acquainted. Get rid of this feeling very difficult, but as a solution to this problem can be a consultation with a psychologist.
When a person with such a sense of anxiety wants to get to know someone and overcome this shortcoming in himself, he can imagine that the other person is in exactly the same position. If you convince yourself that the interlocutor will feel similar feelings, then there will be strength to approach and talk to him. Such thoughts help a person to gain more self-confidence.
When a person is weak and weak-willed, then his main fear is responsibility. Such a person can well follow the instructions of others, but not take the matter under his own responsibility. It is very comfortable when a person is busy with something, and no one interferes with him. It is imperative to get rid of the fear of responsibility, because in this way it is very difficult to achieve success in life. If you become purposeful and responsible, then a lot can work out.
It is very useful to take responsibility, it is not necessary to avoid it. First you need to learn to take responsibility for your life and actions. Then you can take on larger things, such as responsibility for your family and friends. We must not forget that the greater the level of responsibility, the more success in life can be achieved.
Also, people are often afraid to try something new. This phobia haunts so many, even those who are ready to strive for everything in their lives. For them, the new is something completely unknown and terrible event. Getting rid of this complex is easier than it seems. If you try to take at least one first step into something new, then the rest of the steps will only become easier over time. If a person does not believe in this, then he is a lazy person and it is convenient for him to justify himself with this.
How to overcome the feeling of anxiety when you need to say "no"?
This complex is found in almost everyone. Many people are afraid of disappointing others with their rejections. They are ready even for uncomfortable conditions for themselves in order to please another person or remain his friend. In any case, you need to learn how to say this phrase, because sometimes you need to think about yourself and your happiness. There are people who use the reliability of a person and do not even appreciate it. They can ruin life very much and prevent another from achieving everything they want.
If a person does not want serious consequences in life, then you need to learn how to say “no”. How to overcome the feeling of anxiety at this moment:
1. If a person knows that the request will bring him only damage personally, then he must answer in the negative. Before fulfilling the request, he should think about the consequences for himself.
2. You need to learn to speak not only to requests, but also to dubious offers. You need to be able to be cunning and quick-witted, otherwise the other person can take advantage of naivety and reliability.
3. It is necessary to say no at least once, then it will be clear and even pleasant that a person has coped with his phobia. It's not at all difficult as it seems.
Fear always prevents success in life. You can fight with any human phobias, the main thing is to take the first step towards fighting them. You can take the first steps with your eyes closed, if it's really scary. But in the end, communicating with new people and not letting them manipulate you will lead to what you want in life.
How to deal with fears?
Many people suffer from phobias that can greatly affect their quality of life. A phobia manifests itself in certain situations when a person gives in to a panic that cannot be calmed down. He cannot cope with his fears in any way, so he must turn to a psychiatrist. Someone thinks that they do not need a psychiatrist, but if there is a problem with their most terrible fears, then the person will not be able to control their condition.
After visiting a doctor, a person will be able to fight his panic attacks at home. Many doctors advise getting used to your fears, not closing your eyes when panic sets in. If you get used to fear, then sensitivity to a phobia eventually disappears irrevocably.
You can also remember the good and bright moments in life when you panic. You need to scroll through all the moments in your head in detail, then the brain is distracted and completely switches to memories.
It is very difficult to completely overcome phobias, but it is quite possible to weaken your fear of certain things. You don’t need to subordinate yourself to fear, but learn to fight back.
If you have already firmly decided that you need the help of a specialist, you can get it from an experienced psychologist in Moscow. . Do not live in fear, seek help now and your life will sparkle with new colors.
Fight
Fight vb., nsv., use often
Morphology: I I fight, you fighting, he she it fights, we we fight, you are fighting, they are fighting, fight, fight, fought, fought, fought, fought, struggling, struggling, fighting;
noun
,
and.
struggle
1. When two people are fighting, they attack each other, trying to make the enemy land on the ground. 2. When you are fighting with something (against something), you are determined to oppose it or destroy it. Fight hardships. | Fight corruption and organized crime. | In winter, they have to fight the cold. |
Fight against smoking.
3. When you fight with yourself, you are trying to overcome your habits, desires, etc.
He no longer had the strength to fight himself.
4. When you are fighting for something, you are actively trying to achieve it or defend it.
Fight for freedom, for love, for ideals. | Fight for your interests. | The sailors fought for their lives until the last second. |
nounBetween them, a struggle unfolded for the same man.
5. When at a competition, contest, election, etc., participants are fighting, they compete, trying to win, get a medal, the main prize, etc.
Fight for the title of champion. | Fight for the presidency. | Several films competed for the right to receive an Oscar.
6. When in you are fighting two opposite feelings, desires, etc., you experience them at the same time, you cannot decide how to act correctly.
The adult and the child still struggled within her.
Dictionary Russian language Dmitrieva. D.V. Dmitriev. 2003 .
Antonyms:
See what "fight" is in other dictionaries:
FIGHT, fight, fight, incompetent. 1. with whom than. Grabbing each other, try to overpower the enemy. We fight according to the rules of French wrestling. || without additional and against whom or with whom. Compete, try to get the upper hand. On the… … Explanatory Dictionary of Ushakov
To fight, to fight, to fight, to compete, to compete, to cut, to fight, to measure, to compete, to grab, to grapple with someone, to get off; to break spears, to oppose, to fight, to wage war against whom; go to war, take up arms against someone; ... ... Synonym dictionary
And seek, find and hide. Razg. Shuttle. 1. It is said when looking for something. (usually long and unsuccessful). 2. About the need to fight. 3. About mottos and slogans. / i> From the Soviet slogan Fight and seek, find and not give up (from the novel by V. ... ... Big dictionary of Russian sayings
fight- FIGHT, fight, fight; nesov. 1. with whom. Have sexual intercourse with someone. 2. with and without additional Vomit. fight with a toilet (or with an urn, with a lawn, with an abyss, etc.) 1. an allusion to ramble ... Dictionary of Russian Argo
FIGHT, fight, fight; incompatibility 1. with whom. When attacking, try to overpower in single combat. B. on the carpet. B. in hand-to-hand combat. B. with a wild beast. 2. with whom (what), against whom (what). Fight or compete in an effort to win. Fighting armies. B. with… … Explanatory dictionary of Ozhegov
fight- Fight, the forms of this word have been encountered so many times in a distorted form that I want to conjugate it correctly for a change: I fight, you fight (do not fight), he fights (does not fight), we fight, you fight, they fight (do not fight) … Dictionary of Russian language errors
fight- to fight, to fight, to eradicate, to get rid of 0053 Page 0054 Page 0055 Page 0056 ... New Explanatory Dictionary of Russian Synonyms
fight- actively fight selflessly fight uncompromisingly fight mercilessly fight to the last drop of blood fight without sparing your stomach fight tirelessly fight tirelessly fight fiercely fight desperately fight ... Dictionary of Russian Idioms
fight- with whom with what and (with a touch of emphasized action) against whom with what (about the active clash of opposing social groups, trends, opinions). Fight the interventionists (against the interventionists). 1. with what (try to destroy, subdue, ... ... Control Dictionary
Fight, Ukrainian fight, st. glory. brothers, borѭ, polsk. (old) broc się, c. puddles wobrocso defend, n. puddles wobrojs is the same. Related Lit. barti, barù scold, return. swear (Osten Saken, IF 33, 208), ltsh. bãrt, bar̨u, other isl. beria… … Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language by Max Fasmer
Books
- How to deal with sinful thoughts, Tulupov V. How to deal with sinful thoughts. - M .: Publishing house of the Moscow Patriarchy of the Russian Orthodox ...
Loading...